Agenda item

Delegated conditional approval + Section 106 Agreement

The Committee considered item 10 of the agenda.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report and displayed plans and photographs of the site.  She reported that the agent had confirmed that the applicant would enter into a Section 106 Agreement to retain the dwellings as affordable in perpetuity, in addition to the provision of alternative play space.  A plan had been submitted indicating where alternative play provision could be located which Officers had not had sufficient time to consider.  However, it demonstrated a willingness to put forward a scheme.

The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval of this application to be delegated to the Head of Planning as set out in the report and subject to a Section 106 Agreement in respect of affordable housing in perpetuity.

Councillor Mrs W Fredericks expressed disappointment that the dwellings would be one-bed houses and that there was no more accommodation on offer to house families in that area.  She requested that the replacement play equipment should be accessible to children of all abilities and that accessibility should be a consideration in all future applications involving play space.

The Development Manager confirmed that the play equipment could be discussed with the applicant and that the Council could ensure that any equipment was DDA compliant.

Councillor D Baker considered that it was important to consider the size of the replacement play space in comparison with the existing.  He requested confirmation of ownership of the existing site.

The Senior Planning Officer explained that discussions were needed with regard to the play space provision.  The size shown on the submitted plan was not to scale. Consideration needed to be given as to whether or not planning permission would be required for the replacement play space.  The whole of the estate was owned by the applicant.

The Head of Planning explained that the outstanding issues would be dealt with under his delegated authority.  He considered that the concerns which had been raised could be resolved.  Phasing of delivery would also require discussion.  The application would be brought back to the Committee if these issues could not be resolved satisfactorily.

Councillor N Housden asked if the provision of the site included the provision of equipment.

The Development Manager explained that the Council’s policy required equal or greater provision.  As a minimum, the provision would need to be the same as the existing but with modern, DDA compliant equipment.

Councillor P Heinrich considered that this was a win-win situation. Whilst two-bed properties would be preferable, he appreciated that one-bed dwellings with reasonable floor space were appropriate given the size of the site.  In addition, there was an opportunity to provide a modern play space which was attractive to children, which the current provision was not.

Councillor G Mancini-Boyle expressed concern that the play area would be moved closer to the road and if the suggested site were the only option, fencing should be insisted upon.

The Development Manager explained that the site was indicative and if it was agreed she was confident that boundary fencing would be provided.

It was proposed by Councillor P Heinrich, seconded by Councillor D Baker and

RESOLVED unanimously

That the Head of Planning be authorised to approve this application subject to the conditions set out in the report and to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to provide off site play space within the St Peter’s Road estate and to retain the dwellings as affordable in perpetuity.